http://singletrackworld.com/forum/tags/brant en-US Wed, 30 May 2012 01:13:30 +0000 http://bbpress.org/?v=1.0.2 q http://singletrackworld.com/forum/search.php http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3004254 Wed, 28 Sep 2011 07:06:52 +0000 freeridenick 3004254@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>I have one and Dorking local. I only use for the big jumps here. not a great trail bike and as others have said, best on the steeps where it comes alive. </p> <p>Best bike for surrey hills is a long travel hardtail. I ride a Kobe which is far more fun on the local stuff. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3004089 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:13:23 +0000 mrblobby 3004089@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>... and book a day with Jedi too so I can learn to use it properly! (thanks for the reminder) </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3004078 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:09:39 +0000 jedi 3004078@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>depends what you intend to ride it off </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3004076 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:09:10 +0000 mrblobby 3004076@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Well yes, it would be trying to make it something it isn't meant to be. I'm leaving mine as it is and booking some uplift! </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3004064 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:01:51 +0000 davidtaylforth 3004064@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p><blockquote>A lighter build with 150 revs and narrower bars would probably be better suited.</blockquote></p> <p>But also totally miss the point of this bike. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3004057 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:59:35 +0000 mrblobby 3004057@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Got a mega and would agree with the comments as far as use as a trail bike goes. Fantastic in the alps, which is what I got it for, but took it to CyB on the weekend as a bit of an experiment and it only feels like it really comes alive at speed when it gets steepish and rocky (snap crackle and pop was really good fun but over very quickly.) On long pedally singletrack it was quite hard work and had me wishing I was on a lighter short travel bike. A lighter build with 150 revs and narrower bars would probably be better suited.</p> <p>It did pedal surprisingly well though and all the techy climbs were no problem. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3003952 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 22:27:56 +0000 jambon 3003952@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Long travel / heavy bikes are no fun in Surrey; too much inertia on pretty flat trails = no fun. The travel kills all the nice bumps too.</p> <p>IMHO that is. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3003701 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 21:41:41 +0000 davidtaylforth 3003701@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Save your money, go on a skills course and learn how to ride a suitable trail bike, rather than mincing around on some long travel machine that only really makes sense in the alps. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3003685 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 21:39:08 +0000 boxxer7 3003685@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Not such a faff, just likes being riden downwards and hard. Great bike love mine too bits but its not the lightest thing in the world, if you dont ride all that aggressively you proberly wont get as much out of it as you hope. Maybe something slightly shorter travel? </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3003499 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 21:05:15 +0000 ajt123 3003499@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Fair play Mr Miester. Is it a faff just pedaling along?</p> <p>Alex </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3003300 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 20:11:24 +0000 mundiesmiester 3003300@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Built a mega up a few months back at the light end of the scale at 31lbs as an all rounder. When things got fast steep and rocky it came alive and was superb, really stable and a fun bike. However when it came to natural singletrack it just felt a bit dead. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-mega-for-trail-bike#post-3003237 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:54:44 +0000 ajt123 3003237@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Thinking about building a Nuke proof mega up as a trail bike - 150mm Sektors. </p> <p>What do people think? I like the frame, but worried that it's more than I need - might be too heavy. </p> <p>I live in the Surrey - do Surrey Hills, Swinley forest, South Wales, not very skillful or aggressive. </p> <p>Alternatives I'm considering are the new Ragley 10-4, and Vitus Escarpe. It would be my first full suss, but I've ridden Enduros and Coilers quite a bit. </p> <p>Brant must be doing something right!</p> <p>Cheers</p> <p>Alex </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/cen-regs#post-757485 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 14:47:02 +0000 thepodge 757485@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>its a long answer but basically...<br /> <blockquote>are they compulsory?</blockquote><br /> No, if you state your frame is for racing only, otherwise yes if you want to call it a mountain bike. expect lots of mountain &quot;style&quot; bikes in halfords.</p> <p><blockquote>When did they / do they come into force</blockquote><br /> it comes into force end of this year but if you had an old design you are alowed a grace period where you can sell off old stock you had already ordered</p> <p><blockquote>What sort of consultation was there in initiating these regulations</blockquote><br /> very little, some industry people say its a good idea but poorly executed</p> <p><blockquote>so why do the new regs ask for so much?</blockquote><br /> its a fatigue test, it was seen that the amount was an accepted minimum. </p> <p><blockquote>Will we see all bikes having to conform</blockquote><br /> yes, unless its for racing</p> <p><blockquote>and what will that mean?</blockquote><br /> Bikes will get stronger but only predominantly in the areas the CEN requires </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/cen-regs#post-757149 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:09:01 +0000 the00 757149@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Having just seen the STW vid of Cy and the new Soul at the London Cycle show, I wondered about these CEN regs...</p> <p>Both Cy and Brant have commented on having to put a considerable amount of time and effort into designing their new frames to meet these new CEN regulations. These Euro regs seem to require physical testing and certification of new frames to meet some fairly stringent requirements, but are they compulsory?</p> <p>When did they / do they come into force?<br /> What sort of consultation was there in initiating these regulations, as they appear, on the surface to be a bit OTT - the Soul was not a delicate bike, so why do the new regs ask for so much?</p> <p>Will we see all bikes having to conform and what will that mean? </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ti456-breakages/page/2#post-363206 Wed, 13 May 2009 20:56:44 +0000 davidtaylforth 363206@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>Never really heard of many hardtails snapping in this way, its usually the Specialized and Kona style full sus bikes that do it on the chainstay. Think thats to do with braking related forces. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ti456-breakages/page/2#post-363201 Wed, 13 May 2009 20:54:03 +0000 the_lecht_rocks 363201@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>i certainly think Lynskey are a reliable and honest company.<br /> i also think they'd like to protect their product, especially in the UK where Hotlines and On One are pushing their product so heavily now.<br /> it'd be interesting to see what they have to say regarding the concerns on this thread. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ti456-breakages/page/2#post-363187 Wed, 13 May 2009 20:49:24 +0000 john_walker74 363187@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>It's not just Ti frames... I've had two Pinnacle frames fail in a similar manner within 12 months. Thankfully I now have a different frame (albeit very similar), a Kinesis Maxlight XC Pro2 with far uglier, but 'beefier' welds.</p> <p><img src="http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh66/john_walker74/Tractor/P1050123.jpg"> </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ti456-breakages/page/2#post-363163 Wed, 13 May 2009 20:42:17 +0000 the_lecht_rocks 363163@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>terra - mine has a 180mm Tech M4 on the back.<br /> hammered since sept 08 on rock and mountain - no issues (yet) <img src="http://singletrackworld.com/forum/my-plugins/bbcode-buttons/default/icon_smile.gif" title=":)" class="bb_smilies" alt=""/> </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ti456-breakages/page/2#post-363160 Wed, 13 May 2009 20:42:00 +0000 druidh 363160@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p><blockquote> richc - Member<br /> The only bikes that never break are ones that aren't ridden enough. </blockquote></p> <p>Warraloadopish. </p> http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/ti456-breakages/page/2#post-363115 Wed, 13 May 2009 20:28:56 +0000 terrahawk 363115@http://singletrackworld.com/forum/ <p>so-building my ti456 with a 183mm M4 at the back is a bad idea then? </p>